Updated recommendations for breast cancer screening

Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 22, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 498-505

  Gregory, Kimberly D ^a,b   Sawaya, George F ^c  

^a CEDARS SINAI MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

breast cancer screening; guidelines; mammography; United States Prevention Services Task Force

Indexed keywords

BREAST CANCER; BREAST SELF EXAMINATION; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DISTRESS SYNDROME; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION EXPOSURE; REVIEW;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC;

EID: 78449233569     PISSN: 1040872X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283404e71     Document Type: Review

References (59)

1. Ries LAG, Melbert D, Krapho M, et al. SEERCancer Statistics Review 1975-2004. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975-2004/.
2. Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A, et al. Screening for breast cancer: systematic evidence review update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Evidence Review Update No. 74. AHRQ Publication No. 10-05142-EF-1. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2009. Updated systematic review to evaluate effectiveness of mammography screening in decreasing breast cancer mortality in women aged 40-49 and greaterthan 69.
3. Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:1784-1792.
4. Jorgensen KJ, Klahn A, Gotzsche PC Are benefits and harms in mammo-graphy screening given equal attention in scientific articles? A cross-sectional study. BMC Med 2007; 5:12.
5. Saalasti-Koskinen U, Makela M, Saarenmaa I, Autti-Ramo I. Personal invitations for population-based breast cancer screening. Acad Radiol 2009; 16:546-550.
6. Gøtzsche PC, Nielsen M. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; 4:CD001877.
7. Welsh HG, Black WC. Over diagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102:605-613.
8. Aschwanden C. www.miller-mccune.com/health/convincing-the-public-to ac-cept-new-medical-guidelines. [Accessed 14 May 10]
9. Esserman L, Shieh Y,Thompson I. Rethinking screening forbreastcancerand prostate cancer. JAMA 2009; 302:1685-1692.
10. Caumo F, Vecchiato F, Strabbioli M, et al. Interval cancers in breast cancer screening: comparison of stage and biological characteristics with screen-detected cancers or incident cancers in the absence of screening. Tumori 2010; 96:198-201.
11. Otten JD, Broeders MJ, Den Heeten GJ, et al. Life expectance of screen detected invasive breast cancer patients compared with women invited to the Nijmegen screening program. Cancer 2010; 116:586-591.
12. United States Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: recommendations and rationale. Ann Intern Med 2002; 137:344-346
13. United States Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151:716-726.
14. Mandelblatt J, Cronin K, Bailey S, et al. Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: model estimates of potential benefits and harms.Ann Intern Med 2009; 151:738-747.
15. Moss SM, Cuckle H, Evans A, et al., Trial Management Group. Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality at 10 years' follow-up: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2006; 368:2053-2060.
16. Bjurstam N, Björneld L, Warwick J, et al. The Gothenburg Breast Screening Trial. Cancer 2003; 97:2387-2396.
17. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:1773-1783.
18. Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BKS, et al. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002; 137:347-360. (Pubitemid 34977137)
19. Semiglazov VF, Manikhas AG, Moiseenko VM, et al. Rezul'taty prospektivnogo randomizirovannogo isledovaniia [Rossiia (Sankt-Peterburg)/VOZ] znacheniia samoobsledovaniia v rannem vyiavlenii rakamolochnoi zhelezy. [Results of a prospective randomized investigation [Russia (St.Petersburg)/WHO] to eval-uate the significance of self-examination for the early detection of breast cancer]. Vopr Onkol.Voprosy.onkologii. 2003; 49:434-441.
20. Thomas DB, Gao DL, Ray RM, et al. Randomized trial of breast self-examina-tion in Shanghai: final results. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94:1445-1457.
21. Hackshaw AK, Paul EA. Breast examination and death from breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Br J Cancer 2003; 88:1047-1053.
22. Kosters JP, Gotzsche PC Regular self-examination or clinical examination for early detection of breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009:1.
23. Armstrong K, Moye E, Williams S, et al. Screening mammography in women 40 to 49 years of age: a systematic review for the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 2007; 146:516-526.
24. Brett J, Bankhead C, Henderson B, et al. The psychological impact of mammographic screening. A systematic review. Psychooncology 2005; 14:917-938.
25. Brewer NT, Salz T, Lillie SE. Systematic review: the long-term effectsoffalse-positive mammograms. Ann Intern Med 2007; 146:502-510.
26. Spelic DC Dose and image quality in mammography: trends during the first decade of MQSA. Washington DC: U.S. Food and Drug Administration; 2003. http://www.fda.gov/CDRH/MAMMOGRAPHY/scorecard-articles.html.
27. John EM, Phipps AI, Knight JA, et al. Medical radiation exposure and breast cancer risk: findings from the Breast Cancer Family Registry. Int J Cancer 2007; 121:386-394
28. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Ionizing Radia-tion Exposure of the Population of the United States. 2009. NCRP Report 160.
29. Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, et al. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable riskofcancer. Arch Intern Med 2009; 169:2078-2086.
30. Mushlin AI, Kouides RW, Shapiro DE. Estimating the accuracy of screening mammography: a meta-analysis. Am J Prev Med 1998; 14:143-153.
31. Hofvind S,Thoresen S, Tretli S.The cumulative riskofafalse-positive recall in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program. Cancer 2004; 101:1501-1507.
32. Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, et al. Ten-year risk of false-positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med 1998; 338:1089-1096.
33. Molins E, Comas M, Roman R, et al. Effect of participation on the cumulative risk of false-positive recall in a breast cancer screening programme. Pub Health 2009; 123:635-637.
34. Zakrisson S, Andersson I, Janzon L, et al. Rate of over-diagnosis of breast cancer 15 years after end of Malmo mammographic screening trial: follow up study. BMJ 2006; 332:689-692.
35. Jorgensen KJ, Gotzsche. Over diagnosis in publicly organized mammography screening programmes: systematic review of incidence trends. BMJ 2009; 339:b2587.
36. Jorgensen KJ, Brodersen J, Hartling OJ, et al. Informed choice requires information about both benefitsand harms.J Med Ethics 2009; 35:268-269.
37. Barton MB, Miller T, Wolff T, et al., forthe U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. How to read the new recommendation statement: methods update from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2007; 147:123-127.
38. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Brooks D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2010: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin 2010; 60:99-119
39. Updated review of current cancer guidelines for the American Cancer Society.
40. Carol H, Lee, D, Dershaw D, et al. Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the Use ofMammography, Breast MRI, Breast Ultrasound, and Other Technologiesfor the Detection of Clinically Occult Breast Cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 2010; 7:18-27.
41. Qaseem A, Snow V, Sherif K, et al., for the Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee of the American College of Physicians. Screening mammo-graphy for women 40to49 years ofage: a clinical practice guidelinefrom the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 2007; 146:511-515.
42. Ferrini R, Mannino E, Ramsdell E, Hill L. Screening mammography for breast cancer: American College of Preventive Medicine practice policy statement. Am J Prev Med 1996; 12:340-341.
43. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin. Clinical management guidelines for obstetrican-gynecologists. No. 42; Breastcancerscreening.Obstet Gynecol 2003; 101:821-831.
44. ACOG Recommendation Statement. Interpreting the U.S Preventive Services task Force Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations for the General Population. http://www.acog.org/from-home/Misc/uspstfInterpretation.cfm [Accessed 13 August 2010].
45. Bevers TB, Anderson BO, Bonaccio E, et al. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: breast cancer screening and diagnosis. J NCCB 2009; 7:1060-1096.
46. Klabunde CN, Ballard-Barbash R for the International Breast Cancer Screening Network. Evaluating population-based screening mammography programs internationally. Semin Breast Dis 2007; 10:102-107.
47. American Cancer Society. Breast cancer facts & figures, 2009-2010. American Cancer Society; 2009.
48. Horner MJ, Ries LAG, Krapcho M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2006: Fast Stats. Bethesdsa, MD: National Cancer Institute. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975-2006/; 2009.
49. Curtis E, Quale C, Haggstrom D, Smith-Bindman R. Racial and ethnic differences in breast cancer survival: how much is explained by screening, tumor severity, biology, treatment, comorbidities, and demographics? Cancer 2008; 112:171-180.
50. Buist DS, Porter PL, Lehman C, et al. Factors contributing to mammography failure in women aged 40-49 years. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96:1432-1440.
51. Lopez ED, Khoury AJ, Dailey AB, et al. Screening mammography: a cross sectional study to compare characteristics of women aged 40 and older from the deep South who are current, overdue, and never screeners. Womens Health Issues 2009; 19:435-444.
52. Parkington SR, Faine N, Nguyen MC, et al. Barrierstobreastcancerscreening in a managed care population. Manag Care 2009; 18:34-45.
53. Palmieri FM, DePeri ER, Mincey BA, et al.Comprehensivediagnostic program for medically underserved women with abnormal breast screening evaluations in an urban population. Mayo Clin Proc 2009; 84:317-322.
54. Katapodi MC, Dodd MJ, Lee KA, Facione NC. Underestimation of breast cancer risk: influence on screening behavior. Oncol Nurs Forum 2009; 36:306-314.
55. Berg WA. Tailored supplemental screening for breast cancer: what now and what next? AJR 2009; 192:390-399.
56. Brooks M. Breast cancer screening and biomarkers. Methods Mol Biol 2009; 472:307-321.
57. Jotwani AC, Gralow JR. Early detection of breast cancer: new biomarker tests on the horizon? Mol Diagn Ther 2009; 13:349-357.
58. Oude Munnink TH, Nagengast WB, Brouwers AH, et al. Molecular imaging of breast cancer. Breast 2009; 18 (Suppl 3):S66-S73.
59. Karellas A, Vedantham S. Breast cancer imaging: a perspective for the next decade. Med Phys 2008; 35:4878-4897.